12 Jul '13 06:18>
Originally posted by humyRight, good luck changing the mind of self lobotomized people.
I have heard about this bit of nonsense and I have heard of the debunk to it.
Creationist claim that Bacterial Flagella cannot evolve because each consists of many parts and they claim that it cannot function if just one of those parts is missing.
The debunk to this is just the trivial observation that bacteria have been found with some or even most of those ...[text shortened]... nd yet the whole structure just functions just fine. So their claim is proven false.
Next....
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe atheist evil-lutioninsts have a great incentive to continue to lie to support their deception that their is no creator God. Why should they tell us the truth when they do not believe in a moral authority that they must eventually answer to for what they have done while in the body?
Ah yes, the argument from ignorance. "I don't understand X, therefore X is wrong."
Originally posted by RJHindsNo, what they are saying is there is no BIBLE god. Whether or not there are gods is another story. We feel quite safe in saying there is no such a being as the man made bible god.
The atheist evil-lutioninsts have a great incentive to continue to lie to support their deception that their is no creator God. Why should they tell us the truth when they do not believe in a moral authority that they must eventually answer to for what they have done while in the body?
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsThis informal fallacy, on the other hand, is known as "poisoning the well". Even if it were true that all atheists and people who accept modern biology assert that there is "no creator God" and don't believe in a "moral authority" (as it happens, both premises are false), it would hardly be relevant to evolution theory, which does not depend on any kind of moral, religious or philosophical dogma (except perhaps the scientific method).
The atheist evil-lutioninsts have a great incentive to continue to lie to support their deception that their is no creator God. Why should they tell us the truth when they do not believe in a moral authority that they must eventually answer to for what they have done while in the body?
The Instructor
Originally posted by KazetNagorraCan you show proof of this?
This informal fallacy, on the other hand, is known as "poisoning the well". Even if it were true that all atheists and people who accept modern biology assert that there is "no creator God" and don't believe in a "moral authority" (as it happens, both premises are false), it would hardly be relevant to evolution theory, which does not depend on any kind of moral, religious or philosophical dogma (except perhaps the scientific method).
Originally posted by RJHindswhich part? He made at least two assertions that no rational person would dispute because only trivial observations confirm them.
Can you show proof of this?
The Instructor
Originally posted by humyProof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evilution theory.
which part? He made several assertions that no rational person would dispute because only trivial observations confirm them.
For example, it is a trivial observation that there exists people that accept modern biology (which including evolution) that are theists. So this trivial evolution is proof enough that you can both believe there is a god and believe ev ...[text shortened]... ither. So this trivial evolution is proof enough that evolution doesn't depend on these things.
Originally posted by RJHinds
Proof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evilution theory.
Would we have had all those fake missing link claims for ape to human, if they had really believed in a moral authority, like the God of the Holy Bible, that condemned liars? Would we have had all those fake drawings of the ape changing to the caveman and the fish ...[text shortened]... hat there are not many more liars trying to push off their evilutionary ideas?
The Instructor
Proof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evolution theory.
Would we have had all those fake missing link claims for ape to human,
Why should anyone trust that there are not many more liars trying to push off their evolutionary ideas?
Originally posted by humyYour delusional mind. 😏Proof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evolution theory.
Yes, that is what we just said.Would we have had all those fake missing link claims for ape to human,
I believe there was a couple of hoaxes by some people who just wanted publicity but there is no evidence that any of the l ...[text shortened]... tion theory has nothing to do with them nor moral authority thus this would not be irrelevant.
Originally posted by humymisprint:Proof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evolution theory.
Yes, that is what we just said.Would we have had all those fake missing link claims for ape to human,
I believe there was a couple of hoaxes by some people who just wanted publicity but there is no evidence that any of the l ...[text shortened]... tion theory has nothing to do with them nor moral authority thus this would not be irrelevant.
Originally posted by RJHindsIf you investigate the basics of evolution theory, which you have as of yet not attempted to do, then you will find that it makes no reference to morality or religion.
Proof that the belief in a moral authority, like God, is not relevant to evilution theory.